I have been to a couple of AGMs where the proposed grading changes were being discussed. Reminded me of this topic.

My understanding - admittedly based mainly on on a conversation with Richard Haddrell at least five years ago - is that the work around grading, both by the graders and centrally, is mainly a data integrity exercise. The calculation part and database requirements were at one time a challenge, but became trivial with modern computing.

The ECF now has two identifiers of players; membership number and grading number. Membership has a lot of advantages for data integrity, not least it being in the financial interest of most players to avoid being duplicated. Doesn't solve everything of course, and definitely a significant job to do it. But seems to me a single unique identifier is a simplification and a real improvement.

It would need the "no membership required until 3 games played in a competition" rule to become a free membership offer instead. Also, it is a compulsory membership scheme for graded chess, but that has never bothered me in principle.

Hardly an original thought. But I though since we are discussing the big changes to move to monthly grading, it might be worth talking about this at the same time.